Part 3.4 - A study on the Halavāhana-niṣedha-vrata

[Full title: Study on the Vratas particularly practised in the Kāmarūpa (D): Halavāhana-niṣedha-vrata]

Dāmodara Miśra gives special stress on the religious custom of Halavāhana which was prevalent in Kamarupa since past. Nīlāmbaracārya, supposed to be the earliest digest writer of the Kamarupa School of Dharmashastra , did not discuss it in his Kālakaumudī.^[1] Yet prevalence of this custom can be proved from the Smṛtisāgara, an earlier work on digest, written in Kāmarūpa by some unknown digest writer.^[2] It may be pointed out here that, a good number of digest writers have dealt with this topic in their digests among whom Dāmodara Miśra was certainly a prominent one. That, he owed to Smṛtisāgara for regulation of the rites of Halavāhana as religious codes, applicable to the Kamarupa School of Dharmashastra can be ascertained from his own statement “vistārastu mūle”^{[3] [4]} which he made in his work Gaṅgājala I Dāmodara Miśra, who pioneered the Kāmarūpa School to a great extent, was an ideal person for his successors. They in their turn propagated this custom in their respective smṛtinibandhas.

The custom of Halavāhana is not found prevalent elsewhere in India except Bengal and Odisa. Its practice in Bengal is believed to be the impact of the nibandhas belonging to Kāmarūpa School^[5] which shows relevance with the Raja festival prevalent in Odisa, so far some of its rites are concerned.^[6] In respect of application of the custom Halavāhana, there exist some regulations both prohibitive and affirmative. The term Halavāhana is found replaced by the term Vṛṣavāhana also in some occasions. The second term signifies vṛsa or bullock, as a means of transportation in those days. This is a living tradition even today where driving of bullock-cart is an example. This is found included in the purview of the Halavāhana custom.

There is no controversy that this custom is exclusively related to Bovine-Law saṃskāra of Hindu culture. In this context a summary of the injunction as suggestes by Dāmodara Miśra may be noted-On the occasion of the tithis, on which Śrāddha, Mahāyajña, Saṃkrānti, Harivāsara, Yugādi are held and also on purṇimā and amāvasya, digging or ploughing of land by bullock is prohibitied.^[7] One can not employ bullock either as a carrier in the period of impurity. Anybody, defying this rule should face grievous consequences along with his family. However, at the day of offering the last piṇḍa, the use of bullock drawing a cart is not condemnable. The affirmative rule is applicable in the case of Nityaśrāddha and Ambughataśrāddha as means of vehicle provided some distinguishing person happens to present on the above occasions. Bullock was allowed to carry goods in certain tithis with a little caution that, the burden must be nominal, so that the followers of Rudra do not get displeased. However, use of bullock as vehicle in some particular tithis and saṃkrantis gets restriction. Person who is desirous of attaining highest peace and bliss should be cautious about this standing injunction. One desirous of dhṛti (satisfaction), dharma (virtuousness) and dhana (wealth) must avoid bullock as vehicle and for the purpose of ploughing land particularly on the days of mahāvrata and malamāsa. Another injunction is that, if daśamī and ekādaśī become a conjoint tithi and the next dvādaśī becomes a vyastatithi, then the vrata to be performed on the ekādaśī, which is a forbidden one, is allowed to be performed on dvādaśītithi. As a result, in both the above two days, the bullocks are at liberty from carrying goods and ploughing land. The vratin on the other hand, from the practice of this prohibitive rule, becomes capable of earning immense merits and finally heavenly abode.

Footnotes and references:

[back to top]

[1]:

Goswami, B.K.D., Descriptive Catalogue of Sanskrit Manuscript, p.107

[2]:

Doloi, Sarma Harinath, India Through The Ages of The Smṛtis, p.1

[3]:

^a) Vidhistu mūle// Gaṅgājala II, p.69

[4]:

iti saṃkṣepaḥ vistārastu mūle//
Ibid., p.56

[5]:

Sharma, Naliniranjan, The Kāmarūpa School of Dharmaśāstra, p.56

[6]:

Prajña., Ambuvācī in Assam and Raja in Orissa-A comparative note, pp. 63-64

[7]:

śrāddhe caiva mahāyaj ñe saṃkrāntyāṃ harivāsare/
yugādau pakṣayaurnte na kuryāt halavāhanam// Gaṅgājala II, p.31